Biting into accuracy: Evaluating food frequency questionnaires for denture wearers: A systematic review.

IF 2 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Rahul N Gaikwad, Hani A Alfheeaid
{"title":"Biting into accuracy: Evaluating food frequency questionnaires for denture wearers: A systematic review.","authors":"Rahul N Gaikwad, Hani A Alfheeaid","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The correlation between denture usage and nutrition is a subject of ongoing debate, with numerous authors attempting to investigate it using food frequency questionnaires (FFQ). This systematic review aimed to assess the quality of research reporting on the use of FFQ as a tool for evaluating nutrient intake in individuals who wear dentures.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Studies were sourced through online databases, encompassing publications from 1990 to 2024. Four studies employing FFQ to evaluate the nutritional status of denture wearers and meeting the specified inclusion-exclusion criteria were incorporated into this systematic review. Quality assessment of the included studies was independently conducted by two reviewers, utilizing the summary score provided by Dennis <i>et al</i>.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All the studies included in the review utilized semi-quantitative FFQ, with most adopting the widely accepted and validated FFQ developed by Willet and Block. The majority of these studies received high-quality scores as per the assessment criteria established by Dennis <i>et al</i>. However, one study under review received a low score due to several shortcomings. This included failure to report the FFQ items utilized in the study, lack of repetition in quality checks, absence of nutrient database utilization for FFQ coding, inadequate portion size estimation, and insufficient information regarding survey completion time.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The articles included in the review, along with their quality assessments, provided insights into various aspects of FFQ design that enhance validity. These include the comprehensiveness of items covered, frequency of intake reporting, accuracy of portion size calculations, choice of reference technique, and method of delivery. It was observed that the majority of studies favored the interview administration of FFQ, which was deemed to be more reliable and acceptable during quality analysis.</p>","PeriodicalId":47093,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Health Sciences-IJHS","volume":"18 6","pages":"48-53"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11533186/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Health Sciences-IJHS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: The correlation between denture usage and nutrition is a subject of ongoing debate, with numerous authors attempting to investigate it using food frequency questionnaires (FFQ). This systematic review aimed to assess the quality of research reporting on the use of FFQ as a tool for evaluating nutrient intake in individuals who wear dentures.

Methods: Studies were sourced through online databases, encompassing publications from 1990 to 2024. Four studies employing FFQ to evaluate the nutritional status of denture wearers and meeting the specified inclusion-exclusion criteria were incorporated into this systematic review. Quality assessment of the included studies was independently conducted by two reviewers, utilizing the summary score provided by Dennis et al.

Results: All the studies included in the review utilized semi-quantitative FFQ, with most adopting the widely accepted and validated FFQ developed by Willet and Block. The majority of these studies received high-quality scores as per the assessment criteria established by Dennis et al. However, one study under review received a low score due to several shortcomings. This included failure to report the FFQ items utilized in the study, lack of repetition in quality checks, absence of nutrient database utilization for FFQ coding, inadequate portion size estimation, and insufficient information regarding survey completion time.

Conclusion: The articles included in the review, along with their quality assessments, provided insights into various aspects of FFQ design that enhance validity. These include the comprehensiveness of items covered, frequency of intake reporting, accuracy of portion size calculations, choice of reference technique, and method of delivery. It was observed that the majority of studies favored the interview administration of FFQ, which was deemed to be more reliable and acceptable during quality analysis.

咬合准确:评估义齿佩戴者的食物频率问卷:系统综述。
目的:义齿使用与营养之间的相关性一直是一个争论不休的话题,许多学者试图使用食物频率问卷(FFQ)来研究这一问题。本系统综述旨在评估有关将食物频率问卷作为评估佩戴假牙者营养摄入量的工具的研究报告的质量:研究通过在线数据库获取,涵盖 1990 年至 2024 年间的出版物。采用 FFQ 评估义齿佩戴者营养状况并符合特定纳入-排除标准的四项研究被纳入本系统综述。两位评审员采用 Dennis 等人提供的汇总评分对纳入的研究进行了独立的质量评估:所有纳入综述的研究都采用了半定量的 FFQ,其中大多数采用了 Willet 和 Block 开发的、广为接受并经过验证的 FFQ。根据丹尼斯等人制定的评估标准,这些研究中的大多数都获得了高质量的评分。不过,有一项被审查的研究由于存在若干缺陷而获得了低分。这包括未报告研究中使用的 FFQ 项目、质量检查中缺乏重复、未使用营养数据库进行 FFQ 编码、份量估计不足以及有关调查完成时间的信息不足:本综述所收录的文章及其质量评估对提高有效性的 FFQ 设计的各个方面提供了启示。这些方面包括所涵盖项目的全面性、报告摄入量的频率、份量计算的准确性、参考技术的选择以及提供方法。据观察,大多数研究都倾向于采用访谈的方式进行 FFQ,认为这种方式更可靠,在质量分析过程中也更容易被接受。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
International Journal of Health Sciences-IJHS
International Journal of Health Sciences-IJHS MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
自引率
15.00%
发文量
49
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信